DOCSLIB.ORG

Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Order Code RL31339 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Updated November 21, 2005 Kenneth Katzman Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Summary Operation Iraqi Freedom succeeded in overthrowing Saddam Hussein, but Iraq remains violent and unstable because of Sunni Arab resentment and a related insurgency. The Bush Administration says that U.S. forces will remain in Iraq until the country is a stable democracy that will not host radical Islamist forces. The Administration has held out Iraq as a potential model for reform throughout the Middle East. However, mounting casualties and costs have intensified a debate within the United States over the wisdom of the invasion and whether or not to wind down U.S. involvement without completely accomplishing those goals. The Bush Administration asserts that U.S. policy in Iraq is showing important successes, demonstrated by elections that chose a National Assembly (January 30, 2005), a referendum that adopted a permanent constitution (October 15, 2005), progress in building Iraq’s security forces, and economic growth. The next major milestone will be the holding of elections for a permanent government by December 15, 2005. While continuing to build, equip, and train Iraqi security units, the Administration has been working with the new Iraqi government to include more Sunni Arabs in the power structure; Sunnis, many of whom are mobilizing to vote against the draft constitution, were dominant during the regime of Saddam Hussein and now feel marginalized by the newly dominant Shiite Arabs and Kurds. The Administration believes that it has largely healed a rift with some European countries over the decision to invade Iraq, and it points to NATO and other nations’ contributions of training for Iraqi security forces and government personnel. Administration critics, including some in Congress, believe the U.S. mission in Iraq is failing and that major new policy initiatives are required. Some believe that U.S. counter-insurgent operations are hampered by an insufficient U.S. troop commitment. Others believe that a U.S. move toward withdrawal might undercut popular support for the insurgency and force compromise among Iraq’s factions. Others maintain that the U.S. approach should focus not on counter-insurgent combat but on reconstruction and policing of towns and cities cleared of insurgents, a plan the Administration says it is now moving toward under an approach termed “clear, hold, and build.” This report will be updated as warranted by major developments. See also CRS Report RS21968, Iraq: Elections, Government, and Constitution, by Kenneth Katzman; CRS Report RS22079, The Kurds in Post-Saddam Iraq, by Kenneth Katzman and Alfred Prados; CRS Report RL32105, Post-War Iraq: Foreign Contributions to Training, Peacekeeping, and Reconstruction, by Jeremy Sharp and Christopher Blanchard; and CRS Report RL31833, Iraq: Recent Developments in Reconstruction Assistance, by Curt Tarnoff. Contents U.S. Relations With Anti-Saddam Groups ..............................2 Iraqi National Congress (INC)/Ahmad Chalabi..................2 Iraq National Accord (INA)/Iyad al-Allawi......................4 Major Kurdish Organizations/KDP and PUK....................5 Shiite Islamist Leaders and Organizations: Ayatollah Sistani, SCIRI, Da’wa Party, Moqtada al-Sadr, and Others..................5 Mahdi Army Militia ........................................9 Clinton Administration “Regime Change” Strategy/Iraq Liberation Act ....................................................9 Bush Administration Policy ....................................11 Post-September 11: Regime Change Through Military Action .....11 Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF): Major Combat ................12 Post-Saddam Hussein Governance and Transition .......................14 Occupation Period/Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) ........14 The Handover of Sovereignty and Run-up to Elections ...............16 Interim Constitution/Transition Roadmap ......................16 Interim (Allawi) Government/Sovereignty Handover .............16 U.N. Backing of New Government/Coalition Military Mandate .....17 Post-Handover U.S. Structure in Iraq .........................18 January 30, 2005 Elections/New Government ...................19 Drafting the Permanent Constitution and Next Election ...........21 Economic Reconstruction and U.S. Assistance......................23 The Oil Industry ..........................................24 International Donations....................................25 The U.S. Military and Reconstruction .........................25 Sector Allocations for Reconstruction.........................25 Lifting U.S. Sanctions .....................................26 Debt Relief/WTO Membership..............................27 Political and Security Challenges, Responses, and Options ................27 The Insurgent Challenge .......................................27 Foreign Insurgents/Zarqawi.....................................28 U.S. Responses to the Insurgency ................................30 U.S. Counter-Insurgent Operations ...........................31 Building Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) ..............................32 ISF Funding .............................................33 ISF Components ..........................................33 Coalition-Building and Maintenance ..............................37 Options and Debate on an “Exit Strategy”..........................39 Troop Increase ...........................................40 Troop Drawdown or Withdrawal .............................40 Power-Sharing Formulas...................................41 Accelerating Economic Reconstruction ........................42 Focus on Local Security....................................42 List of Figures Figure 1. Map of Iraq ............................................44 List of Tables Table 1. Some Key Indicators.......................................24 Table 2. U.S. Aid (ESF) to Iraq’s Opposition ...........................43 Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance The United States did not remove Iraq’s Saddam Hussein from power in the course of the 1991 Persian Gulf war, and his regime survived post-war uprisings by Iraq’s Shiites and Kurds. For twelve years after that, the United States provided some support to dissidents inside Iraq, although changing Iraq’s regime did not become U.S. declared policy until November 1998, after repeated crises over access to Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) facilities. Iraq has previously had experience with a democratic form of government, although parliamentary elections were held during the period of British rule under a League of Nations mandate (from 1920 until Iraq’s independence in 1932), and the monarchy of the (Sunni Muslim) Hashemite dynasty (1921-1958).1 Previously, Iraq had been a province of the Ottoman empire until British forces defeated the Ottomans and took control of what is now Iraq in 1918. Iraq’s first Hashemite king was Faysal bin Hussein, son of Sharif Hussein of Mecca who, advised by British officer T.E Lawrence (“Lawrence of Arabia”), led the Arab revolt against the Ottoman Empire during World War I. Faysal ruled Iraq as King Faysal I and was succeeded by his son, Ghazi (1933-1939). Ghazi was succeeded by his son, Faysal II, who ruled until the military coup of Abd al-Karim al-Qasim on July 14, 1958. Qasim was ousted in February 1963 by a Baath Party-military alliance. Since that same year, the Baath Party has ruled in Syria, although there was rivalry between the Syrian and Iraqi Baath regimes during Saddam’s rule. One of the Baath Party’s allies in the February 1963 coup was Abd al-Salam al- Arif. In November 1963, Arif purged the Baath, including Baathist Prime Minister (and military officer) Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr, and instituted direct military rule. Arif was killed in a helicopter crash in 1966 and was replaced by his elder brother, Abd al-Rahim al-Arif, who ruled until the Baath Party coup of July 1968. Following the Baath seizure, Bakr returned to government as President of Iraq and Saddam Hussein, a civilian, became the second most powerful leader as Vice Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council. In that position, Saddam developed overlapping security services to monitor loyalty among the population and within Iraq’s institutions, including the military. On July 17, 1979, the aging al-Bakr resigned at Saddam’s urging, and Saddam became President of Iraq. Saddam’s regime became particularly repressive of Iraq’s Shiites after the 1979 Islamic revolution in neighboring Iran, which activated and emboldened Iraqi Shiite Islamist movements that wanted to establish an Iranian-style Islamic republic of Iraq. 1 See Eisenstadt, Michael, and Eric Mathewson, eds, U.S. Policy in Post-Saddam Iraq: Lessons from the British Experience. Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 2003. Members of the Hashemite family rule neighboring Jordan. CRS-2 U.S. Relations With Anti-Saddam Groups The major factions that now dominate post-Saddam Iraq had been active against Saddam Hussein for decades, receiving some U.S. support after the 1991 Gulf war. Prior to the launching on January 16, 1991, of Operation Desert Storm, which reversed Iraq’s August 1990 invasion of Kuwait, President George H.W. Bush called on the Iraqi people to overthrow Saddam.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Conflict Profile
    MODERN CONFLICTS: CONFLICT PROFILE Iraq (Kurds) (1961 - 1996) The Kurds are an ethnic group in northern Iraq and neighboring Turkey and Iran. There are longstanding conflicts between the Kurds and the governments of all three countries (see also Turkey-Kurds conflict profile). Sustained warfare between the Iraqi government and Kurdish fighters dates from 1961. In the first phase of the war, the Iraqi government controlled the cities and major towns, while Kurdish peshmerga fighters controlled the mountains. Iraq used aerial bombardment while the Kurds relied mainly on guerrilla tactics. An agreement that would have granted autonomy to the Kurds in was almost signed in >> MODERN CONFLICTS 1970, but the two parties could not agree to the division of oil rights and the fighting HOME PAGE resumed. With increased support from the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and the Iranian government, the Kurds escalated the war. In 1975, when the CIA and Iran cut off >> CONFLICTS MAP their support, the Kurdish forces were significantly weakened. This phase of the war was >> CONFLICTS TABLE characterized by mass displacements, summary executions, and other gross human rights >> PERI HOME PAGE violations. In 1979, when Saddam Hussein became president of Iraq, he intensified the repression against the Kurds. Though Kurds resisted, large-scale fighting did not resume until the mid-1980s when Iran, now fighting its own war with Iraq, renewed support for the peshmerga. In 1987, Saddam Hussein appointed his cousin, General Ali Hassan al-Majid, to subdue the Kurds. “Chemical Ali,” as he came to be known because of his use of chemical weapons, launched the Anfal campaign that resulted in the deaths of approximately 100,000 Kurds, the displacement of hundreds of thousands of others, and the destruction of more than 2,000 Kurdish villages.
    [Show full text]
  • Train and Equip Authorities for Syria: in Brief
    Train and Equip Authorities for Syria: In Brief Christopher M. Blanchard Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Amy Belasco Specialist in U.S. Defense Policy and Budget January 9, 2015 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R43727 Train and Equip Authorities for Syria: In Brief Summary The FY2015 continuing appropriations resolution (P.L. 113-164, H.J.Res. 124, FY2015 CR), enacted on September 19, 2014, authorized the Department of Defense (DOD) through December 11, 2014, or until the passage of a FY2015 national defense authorization act (NDAA), to provide overt assistance, including training, equipment, supplies, and sustainment, to vetted members of the Syrian opposition and other vetted Syrians for select purposes. The FY2015 NDAA (P.L. 113- 291, H.R. 3979) and the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (P.L. 113-235, H.R. 83) provide further authority and funding for the program. Congress acted in response to President Obama’s request for authority to begin such a program as part of U.S. efforts to combat the Islamic State and other terrorist organizations in Syria and to set the conditions for a negotiated settlement to Syria’s civil war. The FY2015 measures authorize DOD to submit reprogramming requests to the four congressional defense committees to transfer available funds. DOD submitted the first such reprogramming request in November 2014 under authorities provided by P.L. 113-164, and, in December, Congress approved $220 million in requested funds to begin program activities. H.R. 83 states that up to $500 million of $1.3 billion made available by the act for a new Counterterrorism Partnerships Fund (CTPF) may be used to support the Syria train and equip program.
    [Show full text]
  • A Bitter Legacy: Lessons of De-Baathification in Iraq
    International Center for Transitional Justice IRAQ A Bitter Legacy: Lessons of De-Baathifi cation in Iraq Miranda Sissons and Abdulrazzaq Al-Saiedi March 2013 Cover: Baath Party membership card. International Center for Transitional Justice IRAQ A Bitter Legacy: Lessons of De-Baathifi cation in Iraq Miranda Sissons and Abdulrazzaq Al-Saiedi March 2013 International Center A Bitter Legacy: Lessons of de-Baathifi cation in Iraq for Transitional Justice Acknowledgements The authors wish to acknowledge the vital contributions of Tha’ir al-Da’mi, Serge Rumin, and Alexander Mayer-Riekh. We particularly wish to thank the many Iraqi offi cials, parliamentarians, judges, and others whom we interviewed between 2006 and 2011, including many members of the Higher National de-Baathifi cation Commission. Many of our interlocutors died, fl ed, or suff ered other serious harms during the period of research. We remember you all. About the Author This report was written by Miranda Sissons, former chief of staff at ICTJ, and Abdulrazzaq Al-Saiedi, an ICTJ consultant. The report also benefi ted from a signifi cantly earlier version developed by Miranda Sissons and ICTJ consultant Dr Eric Scheye. About ICTJ The International Center for Transitional Justice is an international nonprofi t organization specializing in the fi eld of transitional justice. ICTJ works to help societies in transition address legacies of massive human rights violations and to build civic trust in state institutions as protectors of human rights. In the aftermath of mass atrocity and repression, we assist institutions and civil society groups—the people who are driving and shaping change in their societies—in considering measures to provide truth, accountability, and redress for past abuses.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Cheers for Bargaining Theory Two Cheers for David A
    Two Cheers for Bargaining Theory Two Cheers for David A. Lake Bargaining Theory Assessing Rationalist Explanations of the Iraq War The Iraq War has been one of the most signiªcant events in world politics since the end of the Cold War. One of the ªrst preventive wars in history, it cost trillions of dollars, re- sulted in more than 4,500 U.S. and coalition casualties (to date), caused enor- mous suffering in Iraq, and may have spurred greater anti-Americanism in the Middle East even while reducing potential threats to the United States and its allies. Yet, despite its profound importance, the causes of the war have re- ceived little sustained analysis from scholars of international relations.1 Al- though there have been many descriptions of the lead-up to the war, the ªghting, and the occupation, these largely journalistic accounts explain how but not why the war occurred.2 In this article, I assess a leading academic theory of conºict—the rationalist approach to war or, simply, bargaining theory—as one possible explanation of the Iraq War.3 Bargaining theory is currently the dominant approach in conºict David A. Lake is Jerri-Ann and Gary E. Jacobs Professor of Social Sciences, Distinguished Professor of Political Science, and Associate Dean of Social Sciences at the University of California, San Diego. He is the author, most recently, of Hierarchy in International Relations (Cornell University Press, 2009). The author is indebted to Peter Gourevitch, Stephan Haggard, Miles Kahler, James Long, Rose McDermott, Etel Solingen, and Barbara Walter for helpful discussions on Iraq or comments on this article.
    [Show full text]
  • Saddam Hussein
    Saddam Hussein ﺻﺪام ﺣﺴﻴﻦ :Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti (/hʊˈseɪn/;[5] Arabic Marshal Ṣaddām Ḥusayn ʿAbd al-Maǧīd al-Tikrītī;[a] 28 April ﻋﺒﺪ اﻟﻤﺠﻴﺪ اﻟﺘﻜﺮﻳﺘﻲ 1937[b] – 30 December 2006) was President of Iraq from 16 July 1979 until 9 Saddam Hussein ﺻﺪام ﺣﺴﻴﻦ April 2003.[10] A leading member of the revolutionary Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party, and later, the Baghdad-based Ba'ath Party and its regional organization the Iraqi Ba'ath Party—which espoused Ba'athism, a mix of Arab nationalism and socialism—Saddam played a key role in the 1968 coup (later referred to as the 17 July Revolution) that brought the party to power inIraq . As vice president under the ailing General Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, and at a time when many groups were considered capable of overthrowing the government, Saddam created security forces through which he tightly controlled conflicts between the government and the armed forces. In the early 1970s, Saddam nationalized oil and foreign banks leaving the system eventually insolvent mostly due to the Iran–Iraq War, the Gulf War, and UN sanctions.[11] Through the 1970s, Saddam cemented his authority over the apparatus of government as oil money helped Iraq's economy to grow at a rapid pace. Positions of power in the country were mostly filled with Sunni Arabs, a minority that made up only a fifth of the population.[12] Official portrait of Saddam Hussein in Saddam formally rose to power in 1979, although he had already been the de 1979 facto head of Iraq for several years.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq: Post-Saddam Governance and Security
    Order Code RL31339 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Iraq: Post-Saddam Governance and Security Updated March 29, 2006 Kenneth Katzman Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Iraq: Post-Saddam Governance and Security Summary Operation Iraqi Freedom succeeded in overthrowing Saddam Hussein, but Iraq remains violent and unstable because of Sunni Arab resentment and a related insurgency, as well as growing sectarian violence. According to its November 30, 2005, “Strategy for Victory,” the Bush Administration indicates that U.S. forces will remain in Iraq until the country is able to provide for its own security and does not serve as a host for radical Islamic terrorists. The Administration believes that, over the longer term, Iraq will become a model for reform throughout the Middle East and a partner in the global war on terrorism. However, mounting casualties and costs — and growing sectarian conflict — have intensified a debate within the United States over the wisdom of the invasion and whether to wind down U.S. involvement without completely accomplishing U.S. goals. The Bush Administration asserts that U.S. policy in Iraq is showing important successes, demonstrated by two elections (January and December 2005) that chose an interim and then a full-term National Assembly, a referendum that adopted a permanent constitution (October 15, 2005), progress in building Iraq’s security forces, and economic growth. While continuing to build, equip, and train Iraqi security units, the Administration has been working to include more Sunni Arabs in the power structure, particularly the security institutions; Sunnis were dominant during the regime of Saddam Hussein but now feel marginalized by the newly dominant Shiite Arabs and Kurds.
    [Show full text]
  • The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq
    The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq By Anthony H. Cordesman, Peter Alsis, Adam Mausner, and Charles Loi Anthony H. Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy Revised: December 20, 2011 Note: This draft is being circulated for comments and suggestions. Please provide them to [email protected] Chapter 6: US Strategic Competition with Iran: Competition in Iraq 2 Executive Summary "Americans planted a tree in Iraq. They watered that tree, pruned it, and cared for it. Ask your American friends why they're leaving now before the tree bears fruit." --Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.1 Iraq has become a key focus of the strategic competition between the United States and Iran. The history of this competition has been shaped by the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), the 1991 Gulf War, and the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. Since the 2003 war, both the US and Iran have competed to shape the structure of Post-Saddam Iraq’s politics, governance, economics, and security. The US has gone to great lengths to counter Iranian influence in Iraq, including using its status as an occupying power and Iraq’s main source of aid, as well as through information operations and more traditional press statements highlighting Iranian meddling. However, containing Iranian influence, while important, is not America’s main goal in Iraq. It is rather to create a stable democratic Iraq that can defeat the remaining extremist and insurgent elements, defend against foreign threats, sustain an able civil society, and emerge as a stable power friendly to the US and its Gulf allies.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance
    Order Code RL31339 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Updated May 16, 2005 Kenneth Katzman Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Summary Operation Iraqi Freedom accomplished a long-standing U.S. objective, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, but replacing his regime with a stable, moderate, democratic political structure has been complicated by a persistent Sunni Arab-led insurgency. The Bush Administration asserts that establishing democracy in Iraq will catalyze the promotion of democracy throughout the Middle East. The desired outcome would also likely prevent Iraq from becoming a sanctuary for terrorists, a key recommendation of the 9/11 Commission report. The Bush Administration asserts that U.S. policy in Iraq is now showing substantial success, demonstrated by January 30, 2005 elections that chose a National Assembly, and progress in building Iraq’s various security forces. The Administration says it expects that the current transition roadmap — including votes on a permanent constitution by October 31, 2005 and for a permanent government by December 15, 2005 — are being implemented. Others believe the insurgency is widespread, as shown by its recent attacks, and that the Iraqi government could not stand on its own were U.S. and allied international forces to withdraw from Iraq. Some U.S. commanders and senior intelligence officials say that some Islamic militants have entered Iraq since Saddam Hussein fell, to fight what they see as a new “jihad” (Islamic war) against the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • 6/21/2003 Jay Garner's Statement on Wmd in Iraq
    ; • JuneJUDe 21,200321, 2003 TO: MareMarc Thiessen FROM: Donald Rumsfeld UQ SUBJECT: WMD Here isis a very good answer on WMD by Jay Garner. Thanks. Attach. Page from transcript of June 18 press avail w/Jay GarnerGamer DHR:dh 062103-9 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Please respond by ---7 _ U20327 103 Certified As Unclassified January 9 2009 IAW EO 12958, as amended Chief, RDD, ESD, WHS DoD News: Secretary Rumsfeld Media Availability with Jay GarnerGamer Page 7 of 12 matter. I do know that the intelligence has been what it has been for a decade and more, and it has gotten richer every year -- fuller, more robust. It is intelligence that the V.S.U.S. had, that the V.K.U.K. had. It is intelligence that was not disputed in the V.N.U.N. Ifyou'llIf you'll recall, the issue wasn't whether or not the intelligence was COITect by the other countries, the only issue was whether it whether or not the intelligence was correct by the other countries, the only issue was whether it was appropriate to wait a bit longerIonger to allow inspections to work. What you have to appreciate is that they learnedleamed to live in an inspections environment in that country; that is to say to be able to still function and have inspectors there in the country. And they had a very long period to hide, or do whatever it is they wanted to do with those they had a very long period to hide, or do whatever it is they wanted to do with those capabilicapabilities.ties.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2007 Annual Report Russia
    UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM Annual Report 2007 Annual Report RUSSIA UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM Annual Report MAY 2007 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom 800 North Capitol Street, NW Suite 790 Washington, DC 20002 202-523-3240 202-523-5020 (fax) www.uscirf.gov UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM Commissioners Chair Felice D. Gaer Vice Chairs Michael Cromartie Dr. Elizabeth H. Prodromou Nina Shea Dr. Khaled M. Abou El Fadl Preeta D. Bansal Archbishop Charles J. Chaput Dr. Richard D. Land Bishop Ricardo Ramirez John V. Hanford, III, ex officio, non-voting member Executive Director Joseph R. Crapa UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM Staff Tad Stahnke, Deputy Director for Policy David Dettoni, Deputy Director for Outreach Judith Ingram, Director of Communications Holly Smithson, Director of Government Affairs Carmelita Hines, Director of Administration Patricia Carley, Associate Director for Policy Angela Stephens, Assistant Communications Director Dwight Bashir, Senior Policy Analyst Catherine Cosman, Senior Policy Analyst Deborah DuCre, Receptionist Scott Flipse, Senior Policy Analyst Julia Kirby, Middle East Researcher Mindy Larmore, East Asia Researcher Tiffany Lynch, Research Assistant Jacqueline A. Mitchell, Executive Assistant Allison Salyer, Legislative Assistant Stephen R. Snow, Senior Policy Analyst Christopher Swift, Researcher UNITED STATES COMMIssION ON INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM Washington, DC, May 1, 2007 The PRESIDENT The White House DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: On behalf of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, I am transmitting to you the annual report, prepared in compliance with section 202(a)(2) of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, 22 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraqi War Fighting Capabilities: a Dynamic Net Assessment
    CSIS_______________________________ Center for Strategic and International Studies 1800 K Street N.W. Washington, DC 20006 (202) 775-3270 (To comment: [email protected] For Updates see CSIS.ORG, “Military Balance”) Iraqi War Fighting Capabilities: A Dynamic Net Assessment Anthony H. Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair for Strategy Center for Strategic and International Studies Revised July 21, 2002 Copyright Anthony H. Cordesman, all rights reserved. Iraq: A Dynamic Net Assessment 7/22/02 Page ii Introduction This document is an expanded version of a report originally prepared for a conference at the Naval War College in July 2002. The author would like to thank his colleagues at that conference for many suggestions and corrections. He would also like to thank the Smith-Richardson Foundation for some of the funding for the project. Copyright Anthony H. Cordesman, all rights reserved. Iraq: A Dynamic Net Assessment 7/22/02 Page iii Table of Contents INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 IRAQ’S CURRENT MILITARY FORCES....................................................................................................................................... 1 The Iraqi Army and Key Security Elements......................................................................................................................1 The Deployment of Army and Security Elements .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Using Collective Memory to Bulid Authenticity Case Study (Al-Adhamiya and Al-Kadhmiya Districts in Baghdad-Iraq)
    International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) Volume 9, Issue 10, October 2018, pp. 1–11, Article ID: IJCIET_09_10_001 Available online at http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET?Volume=9&Issue=10 ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316 ©IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed USING COLLECTIVE MEMORY TO BULID AUTHENTICITY CASE STUDY (AL-ADHAMIYA AND AL-KADHMIYA DISTRICTS IN BAGHDAD-IRAQ) Malk Jamal Hamzah Postgraduate Student, Center of Urban and Regional Planning for Postgraduate Studies University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq Mustafa Abduljalil Ebraheem Assistant Professor, Center of Urban and Regional Planning for Postgraduate Studies University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq ABSTRACT The importance of the authenticity in the world is increasing by matching it with the sustainability of the cities, besides using it as clean economy investments, from reflecting the cultural, aesthetic, vernacular, and moral related to any city as investment chance, from that this subject takes its importance. One of important thing in the forming of urban fabric were the events are related to that fabric, from these events the urban fabric get its meaning and authenticity, so we are facing in most Iraqis cities problem of neglecting the effecting of either positive or negative events to increase our cities authenticity, this will be done by defending on collective memory of residents and visitors to these cities, by trying to creating mental map for each city depending on the collective memory of people. The research goal is to find out the
    [Show full text]